Search for: "Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs, interested parties"
Results 121 - 140
of 1,420
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Apr 2014, 6:04 am
The court couldn’t reasonably infer that the posts reflected commercial competitors’ statements; on their face, they purported to be consumer reviews by parties with no commercial interest in the postings themselves. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 3:36 pm
RFRA prohibits the federal government from “substantially burden[ing] a person’s exercise of religion” unless the government demonstrates that the application of the burden to the person in question (that is, denying an exemption) “(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 3:27 am
The new operating agreement authorized the LLC’s majority member to offer to purchase the other members’ interests prior to year-end 2013 for $1.335 per unit, and gave each member the right to accept the offer within 15 days of the offer notice. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 3:27 am
The new operating agreement authorized the LLC’s majority member to offer to purchase the other members’ interests prior to year-end 2013 for $1.335 per unit, and gave each member the right to accept the offer within 15 days of the offer notice. [read post]
29 Dec 2014, 3:57 am
Defendant had a website where it listed heavy-duty trucks for sale, and plaintiff located a truck on said website that it was interested in purchasing. [read post]
6 Apr 2020, 10:23 am
The court found that the term disinterested could not apply to an adjuster who had a direct financial interest in the outcome; the higher the appraised value, the higher his commission. [read post]
19 Apr 2010, 4:30 am
In 1998, Plaintiff's employer purchased the trailer at issue from Cabool, based in, of all places, Cabool, Missouri. [read post]
20 Jul 2016, 2:54 pm
Citing Ugast, the court indicated that strict privity was not always a condition requisite to apply res judicata or collateral estoppel, but instead privity could be established through control:…“parties” includes all persons who have a direct interest in the subject matter of the suit, and have a right to control the proceedings, make defense, examine the witnesses, and appeal if an appeal lies. [read post]
16 Mar 2023, 8:31 am
“Any generalized public interest in minimizing false advertising, moreover, is mitigated by the competing interest of the public in robust competition from a [read post]
22 Mar 2016, 6:56 am
In a direct collision between these two important social interests, a federal appellate court gave online classified ads published Backpage.com an important Section 230 win that will benefit free speech online. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 12:25 pm
Plaintiff fails to draw a meaningful distinction between two interactive computer service providers who created a platform for advertising which contained misrepresentative material generated by third parties. [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 12:07 pm
While he was not represented by counsel, defendant, an engineer with an MBA, was sufficiently sophisticated to be aware that he might need counsel, particularly given plaintiff’s forthright explanation that her purpose in entering into the agreement was to protect her rights to an apartment she had purchased before August 1, 2004, and the fact that she had given him a week to review the agreement before signing it. [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 12:07 pm
While he was not represented by counsel, defendant, an engineer with an MBA, was sufficiently sophisticated to be aware that he might need counsel, particularly given plaintiff’s forthright explanation that her purpose in entering into the agreement was to protect her rights to an apartment she had purchased before August 1, 2004, and the fact that she had given him a week to review the agreement before signing it. [read post]
26 Apr 2018, 1:13 am
I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 3:18 am
In the interests of accuracy, I should acknowledge that preferred shareholders class actions are not unknown. [read post]
9 May 2012, 12:48 pm
He directed them to submit the information by May 10, 2012. [read post]
9 Sep 2021, 7:28 am
“[A]n inference of a statement’s materiality based merely upon its falsity is neither so clear nor direct that it might support a burden-shifting presumption in a plaintiff’s favor. [read post]
25 Feb 2013, 9:55 am
The class action settlement called for creation of a $35.5 million settlement fund, from which direct payments would be made to class members on a “claims made” basis, $14 million of attorneys’ fees would be paid to plaintiffs’ counsel, and the remainder (less administrative costs) would be distributed to cy pres recipients to be chosen later by the judge from proposals submitted by the parties. [read post]
12 Mar 2009, 11:35 am
(You'll recall that the law preserves claims by a BFP to enforce a property interest that the BFP acquires without notice of an impairment to that interest -- here, the order that directed cancellation of the Tandem Nevada shares). [read post]
7 Jul 2018, 6:06 am
SCOV says that the Buyer—by being the highest bidder and the trial court confirming the foreclosure sale—“renders a buyer a limited party such that the court is authorized to issue orders directing the buyer’s action relative to the property’s purchase. [read post]
